> I'm sure there are many people that would love to
> see a true Classic Rock station return to Pittsburgh after
> the decline of WRRK. But 1007 tried Classic Rock back in
> the late 90s and it didn't work. I don't think they'll try
> again what failed once before.
You contradicted your own points. First, it is an accurate observation that many people would love to see (or better, to HEAR) a TRUE Classic Rock station. The key word in your very accurate first sentence there was the word "true". Just playing old rock songs and calling it "classic" rock doesn't make a station a TRUE Classic Rock station.
What 100.7 tried back in the late 90's didn't fail because it was Classic Rock. It failed because it was done badly. Failure is a distinct possibility with any and every format under the sun, if the format is implemented badly.
I saw this list on another website of all the different factors that are part of whether a radio station succeeds or fails.
* The station’s format (established, fad)
* Changes in a station’s programming or formatics
* Changes in any other station’s programming or formatics
* Management changes (GM, PD, etc.)
* On-air talent changes
* Playlist changes
* Time of year when the ratings are conducted (seasonality of radio listening)
* Why a listener completes a diary (To vote for a favorite? To vote against a station?)
* A listener’s desire to be accurate in keeping a diary
* A listener’s understanding of how to complete a diary
* The accuracy of a listener’s memory in recording listening
* Listeners’ errors in recording listening behavior (misspelling, etc.)
* Advice from friends or relatives about how to complete a diary
* A station’s external advertising (TV, billboards, direct mail, telemarketing, etc.)
* Other stations’ advertising (TV, billboards, direct mail, telemarketing, etc.)
* Station publicity, such as a story about the morning show DJs in the local newspaper
* On-air promotions and advertising by any station in the market
* Contests on any station in the market during the ratings period
* Signal strength
* Weather emergencies in the area when the ratings were conducted
* News events or emergencies during the ratings period
* Significant events during the ratings period (sporting events, holidays, disasters)
* TV specials that might attract huge audiences
* Changes in listeners’ radio listening habits affected by changes in personal schedules
* Affect of listeners’ purchase of CDs or other audio sources that reduces radio listening
* Effect of listeners’ viewing of music channels on TV that reduces radio listening
* An undeterminable number of unknown sources of error
I'd rather not list the source of that list, so that this doesn't become a discussion of the source of the list instead of a discussion of the items on the list.
Given all those variable, can anyone really say that any format shouldn't be tried a second time just because it might not have done well in the past? The last time 100.7 tried Classic Rock, it was bumping heads with both 'DVE and WRRK. Now that WRRK is no longer a Classic Rock station, might 100.7 now have a better chance at carving out a profitable niche?
Small enterprises tend to succeed when they attempt to capitalize on the weakness of their opponent's strength. 'DVE is strong, but within their strength there must be some exploitable weakness that would let a competitor carve out a small but profitable niche.
The trick is to discover what that niche is.